13'' 2.6 GHz i5 vs i7

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by coooliiin, May 12, 2014.

  1. coooliiin macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Location:
    Brussels
    #1
    hello people!

    basically, I'd like to know the differences between the macbook pro 13'' 2.6 GHz i5 and it's cpu upgrade the i7, and if they would fit my needs.

    what I intend to do with this computer is photo and video editing (I travel a lot and I cannot have a larger screen or desk computer).

    but in the other hand I'd like to do some gaming and I'm worried that since the macbook is using the intel iris technology, it wouldn't work properly for the photo/video editing and/or the gaming thing.

    any advice is welcome !

    thanks in advance.
     
  2. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #2
    I feel that upgrading to the i7 is not worth it for the 13" as it is still a dual core. For gaming, it will not help and Intel Iris will only be enough to get the job done (low to medium settings for some games). For what you are doing the 15" entry would be a lot better and would cost around the same amount as a maxed out 13". Have you went to an Apple Store to see if the 15" would cut it size wise?
     
  3. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #3
    Between the 2.6GHz i5 and 2.8GHz i7, there is barely any difference because both are dual cores with 4 threads.

    It'll do photo editing fine, but not video editing. For video editing, you need at least a quad core system with a discrete GPU for rendering.

    Have you tried the 15" rMBP? It's very light compared to the non-retina variant.
     
  4. coooliiin thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Location:
    Brussels
    #4
    ok, thanks for your answers!

    it seems that i don't really have the choice but to get the 15''.

    apart from the gaming which is still really secondary, can you confirm that the 15'' 2.0 GHz will do the job for the video editing? thanks again!
     
  5. dusk007 macrumors 68040

    dusk007

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    #5
    If it would not, you'd have to get a desktop.
    There is again not a huge difference to the faster quad cores. They only got a it bit higher clock rate but you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

    You can get by with the 13" too. Get the 15" if you prefer the size. I think 13" display is too small for a lot of stuff just because it lacks screen space but I wouldn't get a 15" only for the speed.
    If you prefer the 13" size it works too. Imagine not long ago people bought 15" that were slower than the current 13" for doing the same stuff.
    Dual core is still fine and for many tasks it is no slower because the clock rate is similar. Some of the tasks take a while on either platform. That while is just shorter on the 15".
     
  6. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #6
    Yes, the 2.0 quad i7 w/ Iris Pro will be fine for heavy video editing. Right now, I am editing on a 2.9-3.6Ghz i5 quad core iMac with the GT 750m w/ 1Gb of GDDR5 VRAM and it works great. The MBP 15" entry should not be far off.
     
  7. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #7
    The 2.0GHz i7 in the base 15" will outperform the 2.9GHz i5 in the 21.5" iMac, as the i7 has double the number of threads.

    Proof: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/575487?baseline=352255
     
  8. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #8
    The true CPU performance between my 2.9 i5 and the 2.0 i7 is not a lot (around a 10% increase). Hyperthreading will widen this in some places. My GPU will tear through the Iris Pro so that is why I said it would be around the same. Having 1Gb of GDDR5 VRAM vs 128Mb of DRAM is a massive difference.

    And if you compare the geekbench scores with the iMac that gets the same score as mine (when I run it, my iMac get's just over 10,900), against one of the highest scores for the 2.0 i7, the difference is much more realistic. http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/574069?baseline=506382
     
  9. blooperz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2013
    #9
    the 15 inch with nvidia is OK for gaming...not great...The 13 inch? Unless you're talking about games like mine craft forget it you won't be doing any serious gaming with the iris.
     
  10. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #10
    My 15" with NVIDIA handles BF4 just fine, 1680x1050 at a mix of high and ultra, FXAA and 16xAF. I get an average of 47-50 fps, with the lowest being 35 fps and easily shooting past 60 fps in quite a number of situations.

    So it's not just 'ok' for gaming.
     
  11. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #11
    I agree with yjchua95, my 750m (1Gb of VRAM for the iMac) gets very high frame rates too.
     
  12. blooperz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2013
    #12
    I play older games on my 15 inch as well with no problems. But don't expect to be running any of the top games coming out this year without turning the resolution/effects down . The 750m is a midrange graphics card...while you'll be able to play most games you're not going to be able to appreciate their full potential. And the point of my original post was that the iris (non pro) will never be suitable for gaming...Kind of went off on a tangent there lol since the OP isn't asking about the 15" rmbp...
     
  13. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #13
    Well my 750m is able to play games great. It will run BF4 on medium (and a few things turned to high) at 720p (I think 900p was also good) at great fps (around 45-60fps). If I turned of AA, I could get the same fps at 1080p.
     
  14. blooperz macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2013
    #14
    You guys keep reiterating what I myself have been saying all along lol...<3
     
  15. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #15
    But your only looking at half of what I posted.

    750m can do either:

    high, AA, 720p

    or

    medium, AA, 900p

    or

    medium/high, no AA, 1080p.

    There is nothing wrong in that. For a machine that supposedly can't game AT ALL (according to PC people on the internet), it does bad job of not being able to game.

    And other less demanding games like Dirt 2 can run maxed out at 1080p with all settings set to Ultra and 8X AA with a frame rate of 70fps.
     
  16. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #16
    The i7 has 4mb cache vs the i5 with only 3mb.
     
  17. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #17
    How about this, my rMBP 15" with 750M plays BF4 at 1680x1050, mix of high and ultra (no medium at all), FXAA and 16xAF, and it plays at 47-50 fps, with the lowest being 35 fps and shooting past 60 fps in quite a number of situations.

    So I don't think I dialed down many settings except for the resolution.
     

Share This Page